[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-ha-dev
Subject:    Re: [Linux-ha-dev] Dynamic Modify the timeout values
From:       "DAIKI MATSUDA" <d.matuda () gmail ! com>
Date:       2007-08-29 23:51:59
Message-ID: de654a0d0708291651k72ec289dm17ab8bbcdb98a370 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> > Hi, Alan-san.
> >
> > I am sorry for delay. And we asked our sponsor and he admit to
> > research what you suggest. Though I researched the parameters for
> > ha.cf, they are over 50 and I think that almost parameters are not
> > needed to be modified dynamically, e.g. crm, use_logd, baud, etc. So,
> > your issue is ideally, but to realize it takes many costs and it is
> > not pratical.
>
> I'm sorry that you view it this way.  It is _certainly_ not 50 times
> harder than what you've done.  It is probably 3-5 times harder than what
> you've done.
>
> Most of the work would be very simple - keeping a copy of the
> configuration in memory, and restructuring the while loops.  And, for
> any parameter you could imagine, someone has at some time wanted to
> change it at run time without a complete restart.
>
> Especially people have asked for the ability change communications setup
> - especially add ucast media - at run time.
>
> People have also asked to recover from communication child processes
> which die - and a similar restructuring is necessary for this case.
>
> These are the harder cases - and the most useful cases.  I know of very
> strong and common use cases for these situations.
>
> I still don't understand the use case for the change you want to make.
> We certainly can't add a new signal for each type of parameter we want
> to change.  Since that's the case, I don't want to add a new signal for
> a single case - because that's not a general approach.
>
> What I mean by "use case" is this - Why does someone want (need) to
> change the heartbeat interval, dead time, warn time, etc. at run time?
>
> What brings that about and makes it a common thing to want to do?

'50' means not working volume time but parameter numbers for ha.cf.
But I cat not imagine what you say to make like the framework for
dynamic changing. In the bottom, to try to change a parameter
dynamically someone has to research the parameter's influence and I
feel that there is no necessity to enable to change all parameters. (
I want to hear others' issue for this point. )

And I do not adhere to the signal. My patch files are just sample and
if you have better way, you may suggest or apply it.

Best Regards
MATSUDA, Daiki
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]